zan wrote:Piratis wrote:Zan, if some GCs continued having enosis as their aim, the same goes for TCs with partition. Keep repeating just one side of the story didn't help you then, and it will not help you now.
You can have your own opinion about those events, and interpret them in any way you wish. However you should not confuse facts with your own opinion.
E.g. a Fact: "Recommends the creation, with the consent of the Government of Cyprus, of a United Nations Peace-Keeping Force in Cyprus"
Thats a fact. Your own interpretation to that could be "Akrtitas plan" or whatever. The interpretation of somebody else could be that it was to protect GCs from the secessionist and hostile acts of TCs against GCs.
Both sides committed crimes and acted wrong in that period. The UN with their resolutions did not blame exclusively one side or the other. Now you could blame exclusively the GCs and stick to your one sided version of the story, but such propaganda will not get you anywhere.
The real question is: Why in 2007, out of the 436 years we coexisted on this island, you choose to emphasize only one past decade, and even in that decade you want to see only what it suits you to see in the most selective and one sided way?
The answer is obvious: Because you want to continue with crimes and illegalities against us. Just like you have been doing from the day you set your foot on this island and for the 340 out of those 436 years (including the last 33 years) and out of that ocean of suffering and oppression you have caused to us you are trying to extract the drop of our wrong doings in order to use them as an excuse for yet more crimes against us in the future.
If that was not your aim, then you would have accepted to end all illegalities today and allow Cyprus to finally be a normal democratic country like all the rest, and you wouldn't be looking in the past for lame excuses.
You have asked the question of why I choose one part of history and the answer I give will always be the same....The fact that A republic was formed and the only republic in the rest of that history is the rreason. Simple as that.
The fact also that you have been using the Taksim point to bad effect for a long time does not make the real history any different either. ENOSIS was there way before any idea of Taksim. You have quoted, when it suits you that is, that Turkey signed away the island to us the Cypriots and then you go on about Taksim...We were quite happy in a united Cyprus with our rights under the Zurich agreement but it was the application of the Akritas plan that scuppered those rights. The fact still remains that the Akritas plan arranged for the events of having the only remaining part of the government recognised after the trouble was started by your police and those in police uniform from Greece. These are the facts my friend and you trying to distort them makes no difference because the EU and the UN are no longer fooled by it. America certainly isn't so your work is done....
Piratis is bending over backwards to be accommodating and understanding by remaining impartial and looking at both sides. Perhaps Piratis is being too considerate. . . sometimes things are really black and wrong and one should come out and say so. But understandably, he is an Inquirer and not an assumer.
On the other hand, Zan seems only concerned with his own interests. . .
Power for his corner. He does not give a stroodle for the other side.
If things were EVER really so bad for the Turks on Cyprus, they had the choice to leave for their motherland. Clearly they could never have been that bad, as they chose to stay.
Cyprus has been pretty, pretty, pretty GOOD for the Turk.
Which, alas, is why they are still around. . . . And because nice people like Piratis choose to hear them out, and try to meet them half way.
A classic case of Cypriots are from Venus, and Turks are from Mars.
Pip-pip
Phoenix
